December 21, 2007 by Shane Kastler.

Mike Huckabee released a “Christmas” commercial this past week in which he reminds voters that some things are more important than politics, namely the birth of Jesus Christ.  The ad is running in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina and is without doubt an attempt to appeal to Christian conservatives.  But it is also a real reminder of “What Really Matters” as the title states….and a reminder of how savagely hated Christians often are in our 21^st century American society of overt secularism.

           

The ad features Huckabee sitting in a living room with a Christmas tree in the background.  Huckabee, donning a red sweater, talks for 30 seconds, wishing everyone a Merry Christmas.  In the background, one can also see a white bookshelf that appears to look like a “floating cross.”  Liberals (and even some so called Conservatives) have absolutely blown a gasket over the ad.  Huckabee is considered offensive for using the word Christmas and he’s accused of planting the “floating cross” to appeal to Christians.  Earlier this year he was blasted for using the phrase “Christian Leader” to describe himself in a commercial.  I ask this question:  Why all of the venom over the man’s religious beliefs?           
     So he used the word “Christmas” in a “Christmas” ad.  HOW DARE HE utter the name of Christ when celebrating the birth of Christ!!!  HOW DARE HE use the word Christmas when talking about Christmas!!!  Critics say he should have said “Seasons Greetings” or “Happy Holidays” or some other flimsy, universal, and meaningless phrase so as not to offend anyone.   NEWS FLASH:  MIKE HUCKABEE IS A CHRISTIAN.  Are Christians no longer allowed to celebrate the birth of their Lord?  Should anyone be surprised that a Christian would say “Merry Christmas?”  Personally, I wouldn’t think much of a Christian who was so worried about offending people that they wouldn’t utter the name of Christ at Christmas.  Now for some comments on the floating cross ad…           
     Huckabee claims that the cross was simply a bookshelf and that they didn’t notice that it looked like a cross when they made the ad.  I doubt that’s true.  Political commercials are SO scripted that I would assume the campaign people would notice every possible aspect of the ad.  But once again, I point out the obvious:  MIKE HUCKABEE IS A CHRISTIAN.  What’s wrong with a Christian having a cross in a Christmas ad?  He could have dressed up like Santa Claus and carried a whole bag full of crosses for all I care.  There’s no reason why anyone should be offended by that.  And if they are then they need to grow much, MUCH thicker skin.  The “floating cross” flap is completely asinine.  But Huckabee has risen in the polls, so you can expect more asinine and baseless attacks in the future.  Now for the “Christian Leaders” ad…           
     Huckabee was attacked for using the phrase “Christian Leader” to describe himself in a commercial.  That would be an odd phrase if he were a lifetime attorney, or a doctor, or an auto mechanic, or a ditch digger, or even a lifetime politician.  But he’s not.  What was his occupation before he got into politics?  HE WAS A BAPTIST PASTOR.  Which in most cases qualifies you to call yourself a “Christian Leader.”  Furthermore, he was President of the Arkansas Southern Baptist Convention, which made him the “Leader” of one of our nations largest religious organizations.  In short, his past includes a lengthy stint as a “Christian Leader.”             
     Many saw this ad as an attack on Mitt Romney’s Mormonism?  But if that’s the attack he wanted to make on Romney, it’s was an awful weak one.  After all, Romney claims to be a Christian too, doesn’t he?  People are reading way too much into all of these commercials.  There was a time in our country when words like “Christian”, “Christmas”, and “Cross” weren’t considered so scandalous.  But times, they are a changin.’           
     Mike Huckabee is not a perfect candidate, but he is a good one.  The number one issue for Conservatives SHOULD BE abortion.  It’s not the top issue for most of them, BUT IT SHOULD BE.  Murdering babies should trump any other issue.  Huckabee believes Roe vs. Wade should be overturned and abortion should be banned in America.  Giuliani supports abortion rights.  Romney supports whatever will get him elected.  Fred Thompson and John McCain oppose abortion but want to make it a “State’s Rights” issue (kind of like slavery during the Civil War???).  Saying abortion’s validity should be up to the states is the ultimate cop out in my opinion.  It’s a way for a conservative to “have his cake and eat it too.”  It’s a way of saying, “Yeah I don’t want babies killed in my state, but if you cross the state line, then hack away at the fetuses if that state will allow it.”  Abortion should be banned on the federal level, just like every other form of murder.  But alas, that’s a blog for another day. Here’s the point of this blog…..  

It’s not a crime to be a Christian in America…even if you’re running for President of the United States.  Mike Huckabee has been a born again Christian since he was a boy.  He went to Bible College and became a Southern Baptist Pastor.  When he entered politics, he didn’t drop his Christian identity in order to get elected.  And if he did so today in an effort to get elected President I would whole-heartedly oppose him.  On the contrary, he has continued to be a “Christian” voice in a political world that desperately needs it.  For that, he can expect to be verbally “tarred and feathered” by a hostile liberal media, overly sensitive non-Christians, and conservative political opponents that want to see him lose.  When it’s all said and done, Americans will decide at the ballot box. Are vocal Christians still allowed a voice in America? One thing we know, they ARE allowed a “vote” in America.  It will be interesting to see how it all turns out in the coming weeks and months.  And with that, I wish you all a very, very….Merry CHRISTMAS!  (Oops, I used that “C” word again)….and a Happy New Year!

Posted in Politicians | Print | 1 Comment »

December 19, 2007 by Shane Kastler.

The following is a review I wrote for “My Grandfather’s Son” By Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas….

Clarence Thomas will forever be remembered for the “high tech lynching” he survived at the hands of liberal senators during his 1991 confirmation hearing. It’s sad that that will be his legacy, because his life story is facsinating. In this book he writes of the struggles of growing up dirt poor in Georgia with a single mom, who eventually sends him to be raised by his hard working, independent minded grandfather, who molded him into the man he is today. Thomas writes with brevity and clarity hitting the highlights, and lowlights of his life. His first marriage, divorce, 2nd marriage, early struggles with race issues, college, law school, and secular career. He even addresses the Anita Hill issue in a very convincing and believable way. The book was much shorter than I thought it would be (I was able to read it in a day)—but what it lacked in girth, it made up for in profundity. I would highly recommend this great story of the American dream fulfilled by a man of integrity and judicial brilliance.

Posted in Book Reviews | Print | 1 Comment »

December 6, 2007 by Shane Kastler.

Today, Presidential candidate and devout Mormon Mitt Romney gave a speech on his faith and how it would influence his presidency.  There has been talk for some time about whether or not he would address the issue.  John F. Kennedy had to do a similar thing in 1959-1960 when he was attempting to become the first Catholic President, since there were concerns about how much the Vatican would run the White House.  Likewise with Romney, there are concerns about how his Mormon faith, which many people (including me) consider a cult would affect his administration.  Make no mistake, Romney would prefer to avoid the “Mormon issue” but his recent slide in the polls is forcing him to address this religous “elephant in the room.”  After listening to Romney’s speech I would have to say I was less than impressed and in many ways disappointed.  Here’s why…           

I would have preferred to hear Romney basically say:  “Look.  I know a lot of you think my religion is pretty kooky…and that’s OK.  But even though we may disagree, I’m still a good leader and a good manager.  I have high moral standards and I’ll make a good President, etc., etc., etc.”  If he would have said that (albeit in a little more polished way than I just did) I would have at least come away respecting a politician whom I agree with on many issues, yet disagree with totally on religion.  Instead, Romney threw down the universalist card.  He essentially said that all religions are the same and that “all religions help their adherents to be drawn closer to God.”  Really?  That’s news to me.  In fact that would be news to most Mormons as well.  And a Biblical Christian certainly couldn’t agree with it.  Jesus, who said, “No one comes to the Father apart from me” (John 14:6) would most certainly disagree with Romney’s statement as well.  This statement was a spineless and abhorrent remark that was meant to give him goodwill in the eyes of people from all “faiths”—-but I think it might have sunk him when it’s all said and done.  Evangelical Christians, who have had such an impact on recent elections will no doubt bristle at such universalist proclamations coming from a Mormon cultist.  In the end, this could cost Romney votes, and possibly the nomination.  But then again, most Americans won’t hear the speech….only the sound bites and comments from the pundits.  And most leaders, even conservative Christian ones, have spoke highly of the speech.  Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Ralph Reed, formerly of the Christian Coalition, and Pat Buchannon all praised Romney’s remarks.  It makes me wonder if they were listening to the same speech I was.  To be honest, they all sounded more like Politicians than they did Prophets….but that’s a blog for another day.           

Secondly, I was annoyed to hear Romney bring up the “no religious test in America” argument.  Frankly, I’m sick of secularists (or cultists or whoever) telling me we have “no religious test” to hold office in this country.  Let’s be very clear about what the Constitution says.  We are prohibited, as a nation, from forcing anyone to pass a “religious test” in order to RUN FOR OR HOLD OFFICE.  (Article 6, Section 3)  But we are not forbidden from taking a person’s faith into account when deciding whether or not we, as individuals WOULD VOTE  for the person.  Do you see the difference?  Romney’s statement would perhaps hold water if anyone were trying to keep him from running for office since he’s a Mormon.  But no one is trying to do that.  Some are just simply saying that they are so uncomfortable with his beliefs that they might consider voting for someone else whom they are more comfortable with.  That is NOT an unconstitutional religious test….that is simply free Americans exercising their right to vote for whomever they wish.

            One more thought on this speech.  It makes me a little uneasy to hear any candidate imply that he keeps his “faith” in a separate category from his political decisions and would therefore be uninfluenced by what he believes.  In reality, your faith (what you believe about God) SHOULD influence decisions in every aspect of one’s life.  And if your faith isn’t important enough to you to do that…..then you need to chuck that faith and get a real one…..a different one….a true one…..in short….a Christian one.           

Mormonism is NOT Christianity.  In fact the founders of Mormonism DIDN’T WANT to be associated with Christianity.  Today, many Mormons DO want to be associated with Christianity….yet the basic tenets of the religion are WAY outside Scriptural teaching.  I won’t address that here since I’ve already done it in a previous article, (which you can read by clicking here).  But I will say that we have every right to take a candidate’s “faith” into account when considering whether or not to vote for them.  And Romney did more to sour me on his candidacy than he did endear me to it.  In fact Romney’s statements might have even lost him some votes with Mormons, which would be highly ironic.           

I’ll close with this statement….. If Romney ends up winning the nomination and goes against Hillary, Obama, Edwards, or anyone else in the general election, I will support Romney 100%.  All elections come down to picking a lesser of two evils….and I’ll pick the Conservative Cultist over the Liberal Atheist/Secularist any day.  But my hope would be a “door number 3” and I have a pretty good idea who I would like to see standing behind it (click here to find out).  We’ll see how it shakes out in the end. 

Posted in Politicians | Print | 1 Comment »